27. Dr Sarah Hallberg Transcript: Part 3

Over a year ago I decided I would cut my carbs as low as I recommend to my diabetic patients. Now, it’s not mandatory for my health like it is for theirs; I’m not insulin resistant, so would this be a problem? No! That’s just the thing. Unless you have an exceedingly rare syndrome, then cutting carbs is going to be good for you, even if it’s not necessary.

I want to show you a couple of pictures of my radical food. So, this is a common breakfast in my house. So does it look like I just broke my own rule? I didn’t because this muffin is made with coconut flour. I bake all the time still. I just use non-grain-based flours: coconut, almond, hazelnut, flax. They make delicious things. And this is a typical dinner in my house with a typical starch. That would be the sautéed mushrooms.

No, my patients and I eat delightful food all of the time and enjoy it. But what about the research on this? I mean is this just anecdotal evidence now from my clinic? No! There are dozens of randomized control trials looking at low-carb intervention for things like diabetes, cardiovascular risk factors, obesity – They’re consistent. It works! There are even a large number of studies showing that low-carb nutrition decreases inflammatory markers, which is making it really exciting for diseases like cancer.

We just finished a study in our clinic. And what we did is, we took 50 type 2 diabetic patients that were treated with our low-carb-high-fat-based program, and we compared them to 50 patients who were treated with the ADA (a regimented plan of eating and drinking recommended by the American Dietetic Association and American Diabetes Association.) Guidelines. And after six months, not only did we find a significant metabolic advantage for the low-carb group, but, and let’s face it, this is important, a huge cost savings.

Our analysis showed that our patients could save over $2,000 a year just on the diabetes meds they were no longer taking. Just think how fast that adds up. We are in a diabetes epidemic now that we are spending $250 billion a year on in this country.

So, I want to show you a slide now that demonstrates where that savings is coming from. So this is looking just at the insulin difference in the two groups after six months. And what we can see is that the low-carb group was able to decrease their insulin by almost 500 units a day. Whereas in the ADA treated group, they had to increase their insulin by almost 350 units a day.

Two important things. Number one: Insulin is expensive. And number two: Not all the people in this study were even on insulin, which makes these results even more impressive.
But what I would say is that this graph really represents two different approaches to treating this disease. The first, our group with the goal of reversing disease, meaning they need less medicine. And the second group, which very clearly aligns with the ADA guidelines, which states that diabetes is a progressive disease, requiring more medicine over time. Progressive unless we take away the cause.

So, what’s the problem then? Why is this not everywhere? Why isn’t low carb the norm? There’s two big reasons. Number one: status quo. It is hard to break. There are many agendas involved. We got this notion that low fat was the way to go decades ago. But a recent study just came out showing that there was zero randomized control evidence to recommend to Americans to remove the fat from our diet. And that’s how the carbs got added in. It was essentially a huge experiment on millions of people, and it failed miserably.

The second reason we don’t see it everywhere is money. Don’t be fooled, there’s a lot of money to be made from keeping you sick. And what we see is, with these specialty guideline panels, they are stacked with conflict of interest.
So, the solution to the diabetes epidemic in my clinic is exceedingly clear: Stop using medicine to treat food.

And for a disease whose root cause is carbohydrates, take away the carbohydrates, or at least cut them, so we can remember what we used to know. We knew it a long time ago, this was said thousands of years ago, and we need, in this day and age, to get back to that notion.